Thread: Crash Test - 1959 Chevy Bel Air vs. 2009 Chevy Malibu

Quote: Originally Posted by Probesport Rust or not, they do crumple like that I have worked on and owned cars of that era, there is nothing behind the sheetmetal at all. The metal was thicker but has no inner supports. I could crawl up into the wheel well of my old Buick. It's a big tin can, it may be heavy and on a full frame but all body panels are hollow and unsupported. Same here I have had cars from the era and worked on them as a...

Dude, are you not seeing this right? The cars were not 100% head on - it was a 50% offset hit. The Malibu's headlight that flies off is not part of the impact zone. There is a ton of underhood plastic stuff that flies off with the hood cracked open after impact and the momentum they carry. It's not rocket science.

its more of a comparison as to how far car safety has come

besides the fact that the bel air is in such great condition, what are the odds these days of crashing head on into one?

Quote: Originally Posted by Dan [Sac] Headlights are kept in by plastic tabs that can't take the shear loads that occur when a headlight assembly is suddenly subjected to let's say 8-10 g's. I completely understand what holds a headlight in, my point is that in an ACTUAL wreck the headlight would not remain PERFECT and go flying 10 feet. It would either crack from impact or it would stay in....this video is a bunch of crap...

well it looks like the new malibu has a lower center of gravity. It also has like 5 times more crumple zones to absorb shock and air bags. What'd you expect?

Rust or not, they do crumple like that I have worked on and owned cars of that era, there is nothing behind the sheetmetal at all. The metal was thicker but has no inner supports. I could crawl up into the wheel well of my old Buick. It's a big tin can, it may be heavy and on a full frame but all body panels are hollow and unsupported.

Quote: Originally Posted by 95pse-n2o Goes to show how wrong people are that still think "I'm safe because I have a big, heavy car." A chevy Bal Air is from the 50's and yes it was made strong and heavy for its age back then, but the technology has developed greatly since then, there are still many strong and heavy cars out there that will with stand a crash better than many smaller or bigger, lighter cars. Using...

Obviously, I'm going to offend someone with this statement, but, here goes....The folks who think the Belair was missing its engine and was structurally weak have no idea what these vehicles were like. There was so much space in those engine compartments, and even in the fenders, that seeing it crumple like it did is no surprise at all. Besides, if that car had been so horribly rusted the rocker panels would have been rotted away and they...

Im just not convinced that wasn't at least a little staged. While I agree we've come a LONG ways in 50 years, I don't think a big boat like that would crumple quite that easliy. Not sure what the frame was like on that car, but as much as the front crumples before the malibu crumples makes me think some things were lightened up on that 59 before it was wrecked. Makes me wonder whether there was even a motor in that car too the...